What if Japan and Italy fought in World War I on the side of the Central Powers?

[Shroob12]

Japan fought in World War I on the side of the Entente.

Japan participated in World War I from 1914 to 1918 as a member of the Allies and played an important role against the Imperial German Navy. Politically, the Japanese Empire seized the opportunity to expand its sphere of influence in China, and to gain recognition as a great power in postwar geopolitics.

The year 1919 saw Japan's representative Saionji Kinmochi sitting alongside the "Big Four" (Lloyd George, Wilson, Clemenceau, Orlando) leaders at the Paris Peace Conference. Tokyo gained a permanent seat on the Council.

During the conference, the Japanese delegation proposed that a "racial equality clause" be attached to the Covenant of the League of Nations, similar to the covenant's religious equality clause; however, this proposal was ultimately unsuccessful despite a majority of delegations voting for it. This rejection of the proposal has been seen by some historians as an event which contributed to Japan turning away from the Western world in the years after World War I.

However what if things were different, what if Japan fought on the side of the Central Powers?

Would the Central Powers be the victors of the war?

Would this result in Russia fighting a two front war against Germany and Japan?

Would the Niedermayer-Hentag Expedition be a success?

Would the Central Powers get support from Pan-Asian movements in the colonies of the Entente?

 

[Sekhmet_D]

I guess the big question is: what incentive would Japan have to do so?

 

[M79]

With Italy on their side the Austrians just got a *lot* more manpower to deal with Russia and the Balkans, also freeing Germans who have to tend to or outright direct Austrian forces at different points. France now has Italy directly threatening her in the South as German forces encroach from the North and no way to reinforce either readily. The war might truly be over by Christmas 1914 with a Europe dominated by German economics with a few scant territorial changes, a true MittleEuropa, and a lot of pro-German satellite governments. Bulgaria is likely the biggest winner but Germany isn't far behind.

 

[Shroob12]

With Italy on their side the Austrians just got a *lot* more manpower to deal with Russia and the Balkans, also freeing Germans who have to tend to or outright direct Austrian forces at different points. France now has Italy directly threatening her in the South as German forces encroach from the North and no way to reinforce either readily. The war might truly be over by Christmas 1914 with a Europe dominated by German economics with a few scant territorial changes, a true MittleEuropa, and a lot of pro-German satellite governments. Bulgaria is likely the biggest winner but Germany isn't far behind.

And Japan gains control of Manchuria and the Asian colonies of France and Britain.

 

[SenatorChickpea]

To reframe your question: WI Japan attacks its closest ally and major financial backer, entering a war with three Great Powers whose combined strength in the Pacific can overwhelm Tokyo. This entirely voluntary war of choice will force them to commit vast numbers of troops to the continent, especially given that this choice will absolutely bring the Beiyang government into the Entente since it's the easiest possible win for Chinese prestige. This war also gambles that Japan will not only achieve a total victory across the whole of East Asia- at a minimum seizing Outer Manchuria, Northern China, Indochina and large areas of Southern China and the Yantgze Basin - but also that Japan's allies in Europe also achieve so total a victory that Britain and France don't respond to a loss to the Central Powers by sending their European navies to Asia to crush Japan.

We're not even talking about the fact that by launching a surprise attack on Japan's ally, the Japanese have given substance to every deranged white supremacist fantasy of the naturally treacherous Asian, likely increasing American support for the Entente and definitely increasing Canadian and Australian commitment to the war, while also making it hard to achieve any negotiated peace.

Who on earth in the Japanese government is stupid enough to take that risk?

 

[SenatorChickpea]

This is a classic 'WI Governments clicked a different button on the focus tree' question. History doesn't work like a computer game - if you want Japan to fight with Germany, then you need to change decades of great power politics in East Asia.

 

[Taco Shark]

And Japan gains control of Manchuria and the Asian colonies of France and Britain.

I am pretty sure Japan has indirect control of Fengtian Province with Mantetsu and Zhang Zuolin

 

[Kayin Dreemurr]

is it just me, or does the OP not even mention anything about Italy at all and focus solely on Japan?

 

[Jiraiyathegallant]

Given its geography and limited reach compared to WWII, I don’t see Japan even considering this unless the Entente is on the cusp of collapse after a long war and Japan has remained neutral up to that point.

 

[Admiral Bloonbeard]

This is a classic 'WI Governments clicked a different button on the focus tree' question. History doesn't work like a computer game - if you want Japan to fight with Germany, then you need to change decades of great power politics in East Asia.

Considering how close Japan was to Britain since the Boshin war it’s a bit awkward how hostile they would be starting the 20s before ending up at war with each other 24 years after the end of World War 1.

 

[Snowstalker]

Japan gained colonial holdings in China and the Pacific while suffering negligible losses. Why would they fight a multi-front war against Russia, Britain, and France instead?

 

[Lalli]

Why Japan even would join to CPs? That not seem make any sense for them. They already beat Russia lesser than ten years ago and Britain is Japanese ally. It would be just stupid go against strongest nations in the world when it could easily take German Pacific holdings.

This is a classic 'WI Governments clicked a different button on the focus tree' question. History doesn't work like a computer game - if you want Japan to fight with Germany, then you need to change decades of great power politics in East Asia.

It is not indeed unusual that people think nations acting randomly even if it doesn't make any sense.

is it just me, or does the OP not even mention anything about Italy at all and focus solely on Japan?

On text OP indeed doesn't mention Italy at all but speaks only about Japan and almost completely just about OTL and not give reason why Japan would switch side.

 

[M79]

Japan might be just enough of a Central Power in this ATL to get a seat at the negotiating table and grab a few concessions/colonies without putting herself at too much risk. French Indochina and Pacific island holdings would probably be the most likely targets along with northern Karafuto/Sakhalin and the Kamchatka peninsula. I also expect if Russia falls apart that whatever government rules Siberia becomes at least dominated by Tokyo interests.

 

[Fatt Shea]

Japan would have a much better chance of joining the central powers if Germany didn't attack Belgium and get Britain involved

 

[Shroob12]

Japan would have a much better chance of joining the central powers if Germany didn't attack Belgium and get Britain involved

Germany would attack Russia instead of Belgium and that won't just result in Japan joining the central powers, it would result in Italy joining the central powers which would result in the Ottomans joining the Entente which will result in Greece joining the Central Powers.

 

[TenThousandToddlers]

The difficulty I see here is that Japan doesn't have much impetus to turn on Britain. What do they stand to gain? The Dutch East Indies aren't anywhere near as attractive as they would be in 25 years.

They can probably scoop up quite a few territories, and the RN is going to be fairly distracted, but the IJN is going to struggle even against the small portions of the RN that get committed. The Americans aren't going to like a rampaging Japan either. Are Fiji and Singapore worth it?

If there were near conflict between Japan and Britain before the war it might do it. Even then, it took 25 years of insane government to see the objectively poor reasoning of the WW2 era Japanese empire.

--------------------------------

Regardless, if Japan were to go against Britain it'd be a gigantic headache for the Allies. How are you supposed to curtail their raiding and the like? Von Spee's squadron now has a base of operation.

Of course, if Germany still loses, then post war will see the RN come down on Japan like a sledgehammer on a chicken.

 

[TenThousandToddlers]

Italy is in interesting, and somewhat more debated, question. I suspect that we see a reverse of the AH-Italy campaign with a border/mountain bloodletting (sort of like the WW2 Italian entry into war). Italy is in a terrible place food and coal wise, though.

Saving hundreds of thousands of AH casualties is a big deal, and bleeding the French further matters too.

 

[DougM]

Italy siding with Austria while highly unlikely is the bigger factor as it frees up a LOT of troops that can then go and face Russia AND it would force a longer front on France as Italy comes in from the south. If this happened on day one that could end up with France and Russia out of the war. The problem is getting it to happen and still having WW1 happen as the power balance would be different so the war may mot happen. Is France willing yo go to war to help Russia if they now that Germany AND Italy are going yo attack on day 1?

As for Japan this is another issue that if you make the change to get JAlan to go to war with GB would that change so much that WW1 does not happen?
I think we could make a case that A) the military gets more powerful sooner. and B) Japan sees this as a chance to snap up some of Russia.
I think this would have to happen say 6 months to a year after the war starts when Japan can see the opportunity.
And if we say Japan has two or three state of the art Battleships being built in GB and GB seize them then perhaps Japan breaks with GB.
One thing this probably does is bring the US in sooner. As Germany and Japan start raiding in the Pacific. That may upset the US.

The question then is. Will France hold out long enough vs both Italy and Germany for GB to get involved? If so will France and GB hold out long enough to get the US involved? France and GB didnt exactly have an easy time of it in OTL and now both Germany and Austria don’t have to keep troops fighting Italy. This allows Austria to concentrate on Russia and frees up some German troops from fighting Russia. So Russia is going yo be worse off.
and Germany has more troops for going after France. And of course France has to fight vs Italy making the front MUCH longer and frankly France barely held the front they had. Now they are facing more Germans and at the same time have to fight France to the south? This is going yo get ugly.
And unless someone does something stupid it probably means that eventually France will not be able to hold, it is more a question of when then if.
They May hold out for GB to join them (or not) but then what? I doubt France can afford this fight long term. And if GB has to protect its holdings in Asia and at least worry about Australia and India then GB doesn’t have the extra troops to help cover the extended front in France.

However it MAY turn out that the US enter the war sooner. As Japan running amok in the Pacific creates all sorts of possibilities that Japan does something the US can’t live with. or simply accidentally attacks a US ship. Even if Japan does not get the US into the war soon. It being on the side of Germany and being much more “active” in the war probably gets the US to start building up its arms aooner the OTL so when the US does enter it may very well be more ready to do so.
The question is will it be soon enough to Save France?

Of course all sorts of things are different in this time line so you may not get WW1 as we know it. As France May NOPE out if they expect Italy and Germany and Austria to all go against France. Or any other reason the war may stay much more limited. Or something may force the US to enter sooner. On the other hand if France is falling apart by the time the US is thinking of entering the US may decide it is a lost cause.
Or the US may get into a war with Japan,
It COULD happen that we have WW1 West. GB, Franc, Russia vs Germany, Italy, Austria
and then we may get
WW1 East. Russia and the US vs Japan

This one is really hard to predict. Heck the US may end up in WW1 very early if Japan helps Germany with its raiders in the Pacific and that leads to a US vs Germany battle. Mistaken Identity for example could see Germany attach a US war ship. For example.

But unless you have something to offset this Adding Japan and Italy will in my opinion ultimately force France out of the war. And as long as GB is not fighting for survival in the Pacific or if Japan has not attacked and taken anything much and is willing to go back to starting positions as far as it relates to GB then once France can’t keep it up i expect that GB will pull out. And if Germany is willing to leave Belgium and Japan willing to leave GB alone then GB pulls out leaving Russia to fight Germany and Austria by itself and I suspect that will end with Russia giving up.

Now if the US was drawn into the Pacific mess then it may end up with Russia and the US or just the US vs Japan,
That s a fight Japan can’t truly win as Japan can’t actu hurt any US land that is significant to the US much less invade the US proper. but the US may give up the fight. Or it may get the bit between its teeth and fight on. It all depends on what drew the US into the war.

As both the US and GB can’t be forced to accept bad deals as they are too wealthy, to big industrially and no one can really pull off an invasion of either of them. But they can be forced to a place that they will concede a few things to end the war.

The problem with this TL is it has no real reason it turned out this way (why Italy and Japan changed sides) so it is impossible to trully predict how it will turn out. So you can make it turn out pretty much anyway you want as long as you avoid the extremea like the US or GB being invaded or Japan marching into Moscow or things like that.

 

[raharris1973]

As for Japan this is another issue that if you make the change to get JAlan to go to war with GB would that change so much that WW1 does not happen?
I think we could make a case that A) the military gets more powerful sooner. and B) Japan sees this as a chance to snap up some of Russia.
I think this would have to happen say 6 months to a year after the war starts when Japan can see the opportunity.
And if we say Japan has two or three state of the art Battleships being built in GB and GB seize them then perhaps Japan breaks with GB.
One thing this probably does is bring the US in sooner. As Germany and Japan start raiding in the Pacific. That may upset the US.

I like your response in that you at least try to build up a little of a pathway for getting Japan to do this, instead of simply handwaving it without explanation, or just dumping on it with OTL reasons why, "nah, never" like most responders.

One thing this probably does is bring the US in sooner. As Germany and Japan start raiding in the Pacific. That may upset the US.

It very well could, just Japanese raiding in the Pacific, attacks of French concessions areas in China, French colonies in the Pacific or Asia, or British ones. But it might not automatically suck America into the war, from a 1914 perspective, if Japan is not really doing this to monopolize oil [and not all ships are oil propelled] not seeking the Dutch East Indies for its oil, and respecting its neutrality, like Germany was respecting it in Europe, therefore does not feel compelled to see the US Philippines as some navigational/geographic obstacle that must be eliminated, and isn't trying to monopolize China and drive out American business competition at this moment.

The United States in 1914 certainly had a decent sized fleet and Far Eastern and western hemispheric interests, but it did not have a President, nor a Secretary of State, who took going to war with a great power who could fight back lightly. America was an important export market for Japan at the time, and it was an important source of many raw materials, and its Hawaii in particular was a popular place for Japanese expats to work. But America was not at the time *the* one source of the vital fuel oil for 80%+ of Japan's, naval, commercial and fishing fleet like it would be a couple decades later that it could fear would put Japan on its knees quickly burning off the resource taps.

 

[NoMommsen]

Italy siding with Austria while highly unlikely is the bigger factor as it frees up a LOT of troops that can then go and face Russia AND it would force a longer front on France as Italy comes in from the south. If this happened on day one that could end up with France and Russia out of the war. The problem is getting it to happen and still having WW1 happen as the power balance would be different so the war may mot happen. Is France willing yo go to war to help Russia if they now that Germany AND Italy are going yo attack on day 1?
...

I beg to differ.
Actually noone knew what the italian politicans would eventually settle on when the war broke out aside their neutrality to non-belliraganza in the beginning.

Nevertheless I agree it's perhaps not so easy to find a twist to have Italy on the CP-boat right from the beginning.